Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: India refuses to accept Gambhir appeal verdict

  1. #1
    Veteran Swee_82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    3,151
    vCash
    5000000

    India refuses to accept Gambhir appeal verdict

    India refuses to accept that opener Gautam Gambhir has lost his appeal to overturn a one-match ban for elbowing Australian all rounder Shane Watson during the third Test.

    It follows ICC appeal commissioner Albie Sachs upholding match referee Chris Broad's decision to suspend Gambhir.

    Under ICC regulations, the appeal verdict is final and cannot be questioned by a player or his board.

    However, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) has called Sachs' decision into question.



    http://www.smh.com.au/news/sport/cri...560877331.html



    For all the arguing between the NH and SH unions (and even within SANZAR) I think we can be justifiably glad we do'nt have this sort of situation where one country, backed up by the $$$, can carry on like a petulant 2-year-old* with apparent immunity- next time we don't like someone being suspended, why not just lock out the match officials like these guys??

    Not so long ago, I looked forward to series with India becasue they were the best contests in Cricket, now every series there's some sort of contraversy, that ususally involves India threatening to take thier bat and ball and go home.


    *Apologies to those with 2 year olds who think comparing them to the prima-donnas in the Indian cricket team is unfair.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    Last edited by Swee_82; 05-11-08 at 11:20.

  2. #2
    Immortal jargan83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Earth Capital
    Posts
    21,511
    vCash
    540000
    why don't they just threaten to take their bat and ball and go home...................oh wait.......................

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  3. #3
    Legend
    Apprentice Bookie
    Contributor .X.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    6,700
    vCash
    -14775739
    Yet another example how a country from the sub-continent has used its weight of numbers to change the outcome of rulings, or even matches.

    what a disgrace.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

    Exile
    Sydney


    "Pain heels. Chicks dig scars and Glory lasts forever." Shane Falco

  4. #4
    Immortal jargan83's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Earth Capital
    Posts
    21,511
    vCash
    540000
    not weight in numbers. weight in Dollars, BCCI make alot of money through TV rights, amounts even the AFL could only dream of

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  5. #5
    Legend Contributor brokendown gunfighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    wembley
    Posts
    8,054
    vCash
    5406000
    he who pays the piper,plays the tune,it appears

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  6. #6
    Legend Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    5,263
    vCash
    5110000

    ICC rejects Indian objections on Gambhir caseFont

    THE International Cricket Council says the Gautam Gambhir elbowing case is closed despite Indian objections after the Test opener's one-match ban was confirmed.

    The ICC returned serve today after India refused to accept Gambhir losing his appeal aginst a suspension for elbowing Australia's Shane Watson in the third Test in New Delhi.

    Indian governing body, the BCCI sent the ICC a letter explaining why it would not accept the decision.

    However, ICC chief executive Haroon Lorgat indicated they had no option, a clear indication that Gambhir would not be allowed to play in the fourth Test in Nagpur starting later today.

    "The ICC code of conduct is a robust and independent process designed to achieve a fair and proper outcome," said Lorgat in a statement.

    "Although we have received an objection letter from the BCCI, there is nothing more that we can do as the appeal commissioner's decision is a final and binding decision.

    "The matter is now closed and the ICC will make no further comment on the case."
    .
    .
    .
    An identical situation arose in 2001 when the banned Virender Sehwag was chosen to play against South Africa at Centurion Park despite a suspension for over-appealing.

    On that occasion match referee Mike Denness, who imposed the ban, was locked out of the ground and the match declared unoffical by the ICC.
    Rest here
    -------------------------------------------------------------------
    Here's hoping the ICC sticks it out. It will be interesting to see what they do if India picks him, because calling the game unofficial won't do it when they are ahead in the series.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  7. #7
    Veteran Swee_82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    3,151
    vCash
    5000000
    In this case they have named a replacement (probably because they know the Aussies won't be complicit in making the match unofficial like the last mob), so we shoudln't see scenes like that again.


    What annoys* me is that anyone else spinning lines like this with the regularity India do would get threatened with explusion from the ICC if they didn't pull their heads in. Instead, beacuse it's India, we get the sporting administraiton version of 'Hans Brix' in Team America- "We will write you a very nasty letter..."


    *Feel free to insert the word you can reasonably assume I was actually thinking when i wrote that.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  8. #8
    Legend Contributor brokendown gunfighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    wembley
    Posts
    8,054
    vCash
    5406000
    India RUNS the ICC !

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  9. #9
    Legend Contributor
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    5,263
    vCash
    5110000
    While there is all this money, the money is only there because they have an international product - I wonder what would happen if the ICC suggested India ask the Saffers what happens if everyone is barred from playing against you? Would there be the money and interest if it was just their domestic cricket ad nauseum?

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

  10. #10
    Immortal Contributor
    Moderator
    Burgs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Country WA
    Posts
    22,868
    vCash
    408000
    Unfortunately probably yes Andy, they love their cricket, even more than Victorians love their sport...

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!
    "Bloody oath we did!"

    Nathan Sharpe, Legend.

  11. #11
    Veteran Swee_82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    3,151
    vCash
    5000000
    Quote Originally Posted by AndyS View Post
    While there is all this money, the money is only there because they have an international product - I wonder what would happen if the ICC suggested India ask the Saffers what happens if everyone is barred from playing against you? Would there be the money and interest if it was just their domestic cricket ad nauseum?

    The advent of multiple Twenty20 championships, and their ability to pay the $$ to attract international stars makes me think they'd do alright. I can't get excited about a mish-mash of a team assembled at some billionaire's behest, but clearly alot of people did (FWIW, given the Warriors have dropped the WA part of their name for the upcoming championship in India, if Victoria maintain their identity as an Australian team, I'm going for them!).
    It'd be nice to think people would still value playing for your country over making a quick buck, but then the old "a sportman only has a limited earning lifespan" chestnut comes out and it'd be 'Hello Mumbai'.

    Besides, any attempt to actually do that would be met with cries of "racism", painted as an attempt to bring India down when they're on the verge of toppling Australia's ascendency and it'd never get off the ground.

    0 Not allowed! Not allowed!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •